Jones v. Paul Revere Life Insurance

238 A.D.2d 884, 661 N.Y.S.2d 565, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4669
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 25, 1997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied the motion of defendant and the cross motion of plaintiff for summary judgment. Although the record establishes that plaintiff made misrepresentations on the policy application, defendant failed to establish "that it would have rejected the application if the information had been truthful” (Cutrone v American Gen. Life Ins. Co., 199 AD2d 1032, 1033). There is, therefore, a question of fact regarding the materiality of the misrepresentation (see, Cutrone v American Gen. Life Ins. Co., supra).

We have considered the parties’ remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. (Appeals from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Flaherty, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Doerr, Balio and Fallon, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Jones v. Paul Revere Life Insurance, 238 A.D.2d 884, 661 N.Y.S.2d 565, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4669 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

238 A.D.2d 884 (Jones v. Paul Revere Life Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance v. Mendon Ponds Tennis Club, Inc.
259 A.D.2d 957 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)